1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to firearms, in particular to the buffering of the impact of movable parts placed into motion by the firing of the firearm that would be normally transmitted to the frame of the firearm when the movement is terminated.
2. Description of Prior Art
Many firearms have moveable parts that move in response to the firing of the firearm, a process commonly called recoil. The rearward movement of these parts is terminated by their slamming into the frame of the firearm. Such pounding reduces the accuracy of the firearm and can reduce the service life of the component parts through deformation or breakage. The shock of the pounding from firing is fatiguing to the shooter and will lengthen the amount of time necessary to realign the sights before accurately firing subsequent shots.
Recent introduction of more powerful ammunition has increased the problem, resulting in the overstressing of firearms that were originally designed for less powerful ammunition. Recent trends of arming the police with more powerful firearms has resulted in the issuing of firearms beyond the recoil tolerance levels of many police officers.
Prior art such as U.S. Pat. No. 3,756,121 to Roy (1973), U.S. Pat. No. 3,901,125 to Raville (1975), U.S. Pat. No. 4,522,107 to Woodcock et al. (1985) and U.S. Pat. No. 4,754,689 to Grehl (1988) employed the use of a buffer mechanism installed between the rear of the recoil spring and the frame that would be entrapped between the frame and a part moving to the rear upon firing. Such a mechanism is clearly inapplicable for firearm designs wherein the rear of the recoil spring is seated in a well in the frame below the surface of the frame impacted by the moving part. As a result an entire type of firearm design that features a recoil spring the rear of which is seated in a well in the frame cannot be protected from impact by these means.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,522,192 to Porter (1950) employs a spring-loaded plunger that protrudes from the front of the recoil spring guide that contacts the moving part at a point in the center of the front of the recoil spring. Such a mechanism is clearly inapplicable for firearm designs wherein the recoil spring guide extends through the moving part past the surf-ace contacted by the front of the recoil spring. As a result an entire type of firearm design that features a recoil spring guide that extends forward of the front of the recoil spring cannot be protected from impact by this means.